Bitcoin's onboarding logic undergoes a major shift: from cognitive diffusion to supply contraction

2025-12-29 07:04:12

【Blockchain Rhythm】The buy-in logic of Bitcoin is undergoing a fundamental change.

Looking back at previous bull markets, the upward trajectory was quite straightforward: geeks discover opportunities → programmers enter the market → retail investors follow suit → mainstream finance takes over. Behind each wave of price increases, it’s essentially a process of cognition gradually spreading and faith continuously expanding.

But after 2024, the landscape has completely changed. ETF approvals and large institutional entries—these changes may seem simple, but in fact they reshape the entire supply and demand ecosystem of BTC. Now, some Bitcoin is slowly settling, becoming a long-term asset that doesn’t rely on short-term trading or swing trading. This process is similar to gold flowing into central bank systems—once the chips are locked in long-term, sellers willing to frequently sell in the market will become increasingly scarce.

When supply tightens to a certain extent, price increases no longer depend on new stories or beliefs. The driving force shifts from “telling new narratives and attracting newcomers” to “controlling supply and creating scarcity.” In other words, the next market cycle may not need to craft any new investment logic; simply tightening supply could be enough to push prices higher.

BTC-0,58%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

15 Likes

Reward
15
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NFTArchaeologist

· 13h ago

Supply scarcity is a new narrative, in simple terms, it's still about storytelling. Bitcoin is really gradually turning into digital gold, and this logic is pretty solid. Once ETFs appeared, the game rules changed. The era of retail investors is indeed over. Speaking of locking in chips, the central bank has been playing with gold for hundreds of years, and BTC has only been around for a few years, haha. Institutions eat the meat, retail investors drink the soup. This time, there's really no way to escape. Is it far to say that the supply side has pinched the demand side? It's a bit harsh. Long-term holders are hoarding coins, and short-term traders must be going crazy.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropAutomaton

· 12-29 07:33

The story of the crypto world has come to an end; now it's a game of capital, seeing who holds more chips. Once institutions get involved, it changes the flavor. The previous beliefs are now just costs. The more tokens locked, the more stable the price... this logic is indeed brilliant. Feels pretty much like rebranding a typical retail investor slaughter. In fact, it's just liquidity exhaustion; retail investors find it increasingly difficult to exit.

View OriginalReply0

MEVHunterZhang

· 12-29 07:33

In simple terms, BTC has shifted from a retail game to an institutional hoarding game, and locking up chips essentially cuts off retail investors' backup plans. As for institutions taking over, to put it nicely, it enhances stability; to put it bluntly, it's just a new trick for big players to cut leeks. Tightening supply sounds impressive, but won't it ultimately rely on incremental capital entering the market? Just tell a new story. The analogy with gold seems a bit off; BTC doesn't have cash flow. Can long-term locking really guarantee the price won't fall? From cognitive diffusion to supply contraction, it's ultimately just a different way of cutting people. Wait, if this logic continues, won't retail investors be completely sidelined?

View OriginalReply0

SchrodingerWallet

· 12-29 07:31

In simple terms, it shifts from storytelling to choking points. After institutions finish accumulating, retail investors are left to take the fall.

View OriginalReply0

RumbleValidator

· 12-29 07:29

From the supply-side perspective, it indeed hits the pain point, but I think data is the real key—what is the exact percentage of BTC currently flowing into holding wallets? We can't just talk about the phenomenon. Institutions pouring money in ≠ consensus mechanism upgrade, don't confuse the two. ETFs only strengthen the financial attributes, which actually weakens the belief in decentralization—this is the real issue, right? The supply chain lock-in theory sounds perfect, but historically, during flash crashes, these long-term holders will also run. Don't deceive yourselves. Price detaching from narrative is the most dangerous—it's purely financial speculation. Without network value support, a correction is inevitable.

View OriginalReply0

SlowLearnerWang

· 12-29 07:27

You're talking about "tightening supply" again. Why didn't you say so earlier? Weren't we already discussing this in the group two months ago? Why are you still a half beat behind? The ETF has already been in place for a while, okay? The analogy of gold flowing through central banks... sounds very professional but doesn't seem to bring anything new. Are sellers scarce? What about the coins held by retail investors? I still want to buy the dip.

View OriginalReply0

OldLeekMaster

· 12-29 07:14

Supply is just price increase, this logic makes sense. The coins are locked by institutions, retail investors are still trading in waves, which is indeed a bit crazy. Shifting from story-driven to supply-driven, it's quite interesting, but it depends on the actual locked amount in the future. In the past bull markets, prices rose when there were more people; now, ironically, we hope the coins become fewer. Can the central bank's gold strategy be applied here? Will BNB and Ethereum also follow this path? Long-term locking creates scarcity, but it feels like just finding reasons to buy at high levels.

View OriginalReply0